Coman

The government wants to consult with LLPs particularly in large law firms where the LLP has corporate partners through which profits are channeled to the beneficial owners of the business. Another form of avoidance is through loss relief to the partners on failed LLPs. The aim is to introduce anti-avoidance legislation, although final details of any proposals have not yet been published. Occasionally similar arrangements may suit smaller business.

Please read my article for analysis on how this budget affects you as a taxpayer, employee and business owner; 2013 Budget

A silly four minute compliation of Harold Lloyd. Watch out for the dance about two and half minutes in.

Coman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Any advice on removal of fox droppings from my > courtyard I happen to like foxes, but I don't like them fouling on my granite fourcourt. If there was less food litter in the area then fox numbers would be sustainable at a natural level. There is ample food source in local parks and gardens. Reisdents should be encouraged to feed pigeons and foxes at a designated place in the local park or community area

Any advice on removal of fox droppings from my courtyard

Silence. (except in one designated carriage, at the very rear) Penalties would apply. Financial penalties

Christopher Lee, Chuck Berry

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have a colleague who does Pacific rather than > specific, which always makes me smile.With regards > lyrics, I thought Hendrix was asking us to excuse > him whilst he kissed this guy! There is an amusing Mitchell and Webb sketch on this:

Although these distinctions all seem rather bizarre to us as consumers, they could be a big deal to a large confectioners and as such there is reams of case law on the subject, and the guidance on the HMRC website is pretty detailed. I now realise my first post on this forum was a bit of a generalisation. The point is that luxury foods are often fattening, and have extra tax on them. Taken in isolation, from a pure tax perspective a poorer person may well be slimmer, because of the VAT treatment for instance of chocolate covered biscuits. On the other hand, even slimming products, that are confectionery like, or have the appearance and taste of chocolate, and they often do, will have VAT added to them. I hope my guidance has been helpful.

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rice cakes are thought of as cake? What > godforsaken punitive planet is that??? Rosie H It is a difficult task to decide what products are a luxury and which are a necessity, and the line has to be drawn at some point. Savoury food does not have VAT on it if further preparation is required for it to be consumed. A clear example might be plain flour. On this basis, a savoury unflavoured rice cake has no VAT. In the same way, a flavoured rice cake has VAT on it, this is because it can be consumed immediately, without any further preparation. You could argue that you could eat say plain flour without preparation if you were sufficiently hungry, but this is not the intended purpose. Where the rice cakes are sweet they are deemed to be a biscuit not covered in chocolate and are therefore have no VAT. I am unfamiliar with a rice cake with a chocolate covering, however VAT would be added to the cost of purchasing this product. Change the coat from chocolate or a substance similar in taste and appearance to a coating which does not contain chocolate such as icing and again no VAT. The rulings seem daft by these have been decided historically by the courts and attempt at a distinction between luxury and necessary food items. I hope this helps

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Coman - there's no VAT on cakes! Jeremy, whilst many cake products are zero rated, there are also many food products widely considered to be cake on which VAT is charged and it behooves me to list some of the more obvious: Rice cakes (unless unflavoured.) Cakes supplied in the course of catering Cereal bars and Florentines Inedible cake decorations sold on their own. Chocolate coated biscuits. Ice cream gateaux and cakes. It seems that while you may believe your cake is free of VAT, many products thought of as cake have VAT on them. Well done on noting the technicality. I have remembered this for the future.

Luxury foods, such as cake and hot takeaways have VAT on them. The VAT now applies to hot pasties and pies

I am surprised that they got it passed planning. Unless there are underground parking facilities, which are unlikely.

Dulwich? Best not to scratch it

Hello I am interested

The Coman & Co blog has recently been updated with a post about the Child Benefit Tax Charge being introduced from 7 January 2013. The guide briefly summarises the new regime. My personal view, however, is that the charge unduly takes no account of household income or has no London weighting. Taking the example of a parent where one earns ?50,000 and the other has no income. This person?s income tax for 2012-13 would be ?9,884.00 and their national insurance would be ?4,337.36. Net pay would therefore be ?35,778.64. According to Foxtons, the average house price for a one bed property in East Dulwich is ?200,848. The average for a two bed (say a married couple wishing their child to sleep in a separate room) is ?291,162.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The point is all governments intentionally allow > the effective tax rate to be dramatically lowered > via various mechanisms because of the benefits > (growth and lower prices). It is widely known that big businesses tends to use their international base to avoid corporation tax. Nevertheless, I estimate that they end up paying considerably more in (employers' and employees') national insurance and VAT, than the average small business.

Possible Elements of HMRC (regarding alleged 'sweetheart' deals with the multinationals)

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Will she be tax deductible? I am struggling with myself not present a technical response to this question. or in the words of Elenochka!!!, "I promise that I on 100%"

Dear East Dulwichers, I recently received this promising email and I wondered how I might respond to such a tempting offer. "Hello!!! I am sorry for the unexpected letter, but I write you for the purpose of acquaintance! My name is Elena! I live in Russia! I am lonely and I have no children! I am romantic, kind, careful and gentle woman! I very much love children, animal, sports, cookery, the nature campaigns and picnics, I adore to listen to music and to look films! I have a possibility to arrive to Australia! But at first, I would like to get acquainted with the good man! In hope that from our correspondence there will be a good friendship, and probably serious relations at a meeting! I do not write to you for a deceit, I am fair and I wish to begin serious relations with the man! I am not going to play with your feelings, I promise that I on 100% will be fair with you! If you are lonely and wish to get acquainted, please write to me, I will be very glad to begin acquaintance to you! I send you my photo! I hope that it will help us to hold communication more strong! Please write to my personal mailbox: starlika985@yahoo.com I wait for your answer! With the big hope!!! Elenochka!!!"

Driving around Shoreditch earlier I spotted this: http://lh5.ggpht.com/9juHVR3ThrZ7vQbkd-WBeL8L1bebD5rMSdo5PCKRRCtV6olwUXu70O6rlIC4ABxG7t8b6jWuoxNw7-1W=s320 Forget Clapham. It seems even the shopkeepers around Hoxton 'want it'

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I can't work out a way in which both approaches > could be simultaneously grammatically correct? > > If her name was Julia Know, then the apostrophe > would work, but the lack of one would not. > > However I suspect it's just an imperfect > conjugation of the verb 'to know' for the third > person singular. > > If it was a sales and marketing strategy it was a > poor one, since the deliberate error would only > appeal to grammar pedants whose obsession with > words suggests that like me they're no oil > painting. The verb know is conjugated knows only in the third person. Know's is a contraction of know is, and the shop title is an extract from a sentence. I chose the second person, since the second person singular and second person plural are both you. In the second person, the interruption of the sentence with Julia for clarification purposes, is arguably most authentic. Say, in this beauty contest, Julia has been appointed judge and a journalist calling to question her verdict, asks, "Is this a quality that you know is beauty, Julia?" Or to re-phase, "Is this a quality that you, Julia know's beauty" Huguenot, her name can't be Julia Know. Referring back to the shop sign, the second word is not capitalised. I don't have enough information to respond to the speculation on store's marketing, and I would like to retract my comment about the deliberate misspelling. I only wish to comment on the grammatical aspect of the shop name. I hope this helps

Further to my last post, I can let you know that underneath the "Julia Knows Beauty" shop sign is the name "Julia Know's Beauty" on the shop awning. A clearer picture can be viewed here:

Ted Max Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I feel Coman is only telling half the story here > and has deliberately quoted the sunshades out of > context for comic effect. What a heartless > b*stard. > > http://i45.tinypic.com/11t1uev.jpg In response, I distinctly remember the shop name, Julie Know's Beauty. However checking Google Maps it seems I can only find the same store you have found. I suspect that the shop owners started with the name Julia Knows Beauty and altered the name, perhaps in the hope that the deliberate misspelling would attract more business to the shop. This would be a careful guess. To recap on my first post, I have included the words "Julie Know's Beauty" in a context where these words make sense, and I found the resulting sentence to sound fun and lyrical. I appreciate that the shop name could simply be wrong punctuation, but on closer analysis, I established that this may not be the only possibility. I would like to commend the shop, even though I have no vested interest in it, for creating a noticeable name, and for nonethless creating a name which adheres to grammar. I can appreciate how you thought I may have made the shop name up, however this is not the case. All the same, please let me know the reason that you consider me to be 'heartless b*stard." Ray Coman

Taking the bus replacement from ED station today, I noted the shop towards the top of Walworth Road with the poetic title "Julie Know's Beauty." As in 'Well regarded for your good taste, this is something that you, Julie, know is beauty.' I wanted to share the eccentric, lyrical sounding shop name